- Irene Corgiat and the Shroud of Turin
- Michael Janson on Pyro and Computer Graphics
- Jim Hicks--Portraits in Pyrography and Chalk
- Michael Mabbott--Solar Pyroengravings
Graphic artist and professor of computer graphics Michael Janson of St. Petersburg has been expanding
his pyrographic abstracts since we first read about him in the summer of
2001 in Pyrograffiti
12. Michael began scanning his "pyropieces" (as he calls
them) for that article, which was his internet debut.
When he wrote last December he included his work above entitled Oval Object, "created," he said, "by the influence/impression of art of South American Indians." "It's not just borrowed from it," he continued, "but I speak about the meaning of shape and principles of its transformation."
He asked at that time what I thought about the theme of Pyrography and Computer Graphics. I agreed the topic would be of great interest to all of us. He soon sent along his introductory lecture and the following five variations--"computer transformations," he called them, which he created on his computer from his original pyrograph Oval Object.
His writing was so helpful, clear (he's a talented teacher, too) and charming (you can almost hear a slight Russian accent as you read) that I thought you would enjoy reading his innovative lecture just as he wrote it.
Thank you, Michael, from all of us. And Happy Anniversary to your great city and cultural center of St. Petersburg celebrating its tricentennial this year!
Combination of Pyrography and PC is not an
exotic one. Our association
(I.A.P.A.) is the great result of their
alliance. But the real basis of
our professional intercourse is e-image.
Without it we can only speak
about our work. Of course, we can make
photos and send them by
airmail... But this way fits/suits only for
small group, not for
hundreds or even thousands of members.
And I ask you: what is the difference (the difference of principle!) between the photo of pyro and the e-image of pyro? So, "pyrography as e-image" is our everyday-net-reality. That is the fact.
(Computer Version No. 1)
When something transforms into e-image,
there is only one step to
computer graphics temptation... But my
reason was another: I like
pyrography and I don't like computer
graphics. I like pyrography for
unique colouring and aura [Webster: a
subtle influence or quality
emanating from or surrounding a person or
object]. I don't like
graphics (CG) for its facelessness,
and aggression. But CG
technology give me the wonderful
possibility to contemplate my
(image, not the real pyropiece!) and to
play with it.
You may ask: Michael, why do you "play" with your image AFTER your pyrowork, not DURING?
(Computer Version No. 2)
You know that the temperature behaviour of
material has many problems.
So, when I do my pyrography, my attention
concentrates on the very
area around instrument contact with paper
or wood. I see my
composition as a whole only from time to
time. This phase of work I
call microscope. When
over and I have e-image, the
phase, which I call
begins. There are no problems
material or instrument. I can look at my
picture in various
orientations, details, fragments, frames,
Technique. I use CorelXARA2.0. With the help of Fill Tool (Bitmap) I choose [best of] lovely pictures on display and save them as new pyro-comp-works. My first (and last) rule is to keep carefully the great charm of pyrography. That's all.
(Computer Version No. 3)
My story is not full without one detail: my pyroworks are improvisations. I haven't clear plan or idea every time I begin to work. I have only wish to do something and mood to do somehow. That is why the process of creating a picture is interesting for me on all steps. Even when the work is over...
(Computer Version No. 4)
At the beginning of cinema people made
their first movies using the
experience of theatre. Only years later
they began to recognize
cinema as an independent form of the art
with its own great
possibilities. It was very difficult and
long process. And the same
situation you may see in pyrography: people
take photos or drawings or
paintings and translate them into
pyrography. What for? If we want
pyrography to be one of the fine arts we
must stop retelling another's
I think that pyrography as e-image must be [its own] separate category.
Michael explains the concept of
pyrography as e-image in this way: "This technology
gives the easy possibility for producing new e-images. Though they
haven't got the real pyro-prototype, they look like e-images of
pyrography (on paper). So, we can say: this technology 'looks like'
pyrography. But it is not the imitation. It is the continuation of
pyrography in E-space. "
"I don't separate, I understand the process as a whole unending process."
(Computer Version No. 5)
I remembered I saw on TV "Blow-up" by Antonioni. It's my favourite film. There you can clearly watch the process of working with any visual image. The hero of the film makes his photos without understanding the situation. He understands it only in the process of contemplating his photos. And that's what I do. There are specific differences between pyrography and photography. But the main idea is constant: at first you must get the image and only then you may investigate it.
Click here to go back to page one
2003, Kathleen M. Garvey Menéndez, all rights reserved.